Top judge calls for rules which force women to take off veils when giving evidence in court

Women in veils should be compelled to show their faces when giving evidence in court under “tougher” new rules to ensure that justice is done, Britain’s most senior female judge said .

Baroness Hale, deputy president of the Supreme Court, said “ways have got to be found” to ensure that face coverings are removed for key parts of court hearings and added that there “must come a point” at which judges insist veils are lifted.

She said that seeing faces could be “important” and “necessary” when women were testifying and on other occasions, such as when the issue of identity or recognition was at stake.

 

Lady Hale said the need for a firm approach had been illustrated by one family law case in which she had detected that a mother was lying by seeing her facial expressions after the woman was required to remove her head covering.

Her call came in an interview with the Evening Standard in which she also expressed concern at the “shocking” misogyny of male barristers who make “snide comments” about female judges — and backed action to stop “bullying and intimidatory” questioning of sex crime victims.

• Lady Hale further called for the introduction of a new system of “no fault” divorce and warned against legislation to give statutory force to “pre-nup” marital agreements. Her most forceful comments, however, were on the contentious subject of whether women should be allowed to wear the veil in court.

It was thrust to the top  of public debate by a Blackfriars crown court case  last year when Londoner Rebekah Dawson, 22, refused to remove her niqab during her trial for witness intimidation.

 The judge in the case told Dawson — later jailed for six months after pleading guilty — she would have to show her face if giving evidence, which she declined to do.

The Lord Chief Justice responded to the case by vowing to publish guidelines on the issue. They are still being prepared. But Lady Hale made clear she feels the rules must require veils be removed at critical points in court.

“We should devise ways of making it possible and insisting people show their full face when it is necessary,” she said. “There must come a point where we can insist.

“We don’t object to allowing people to do things for sincerely held religious reasons if they don’t do any harm. If it does harm, we have to be a bit tougher.”

 Lady Hale said it might be possible to “accommodate” a woman’s religious beliefs by the use of screens.

But she said a case in which she told a woman in “full purdah” that she must show her face when giving evidence had proved the importance of insisting that veils were removed.

“In that particular case it really was very obvious both that she loved her children fantastically and that there were occasions when she was lying,” she said.

“I don’t think it would have been  as obvious if I’d only been able to see her eyes.

“There are other situations, not only giving evidence, when it’s necessary to be able to recognise people and identify people. 

If it’s necessary to see their face then ways have got to be found to allow that to happen.”

Reform call: Lady Hale at the Supreme Court (Picture: Jeremy Selwyn)